PARCC data is up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if this is a small sample size issue, but looking at the raw data, ITS and LAMB seem to have horrible success with at risk- students whereas YY and Sela seem to be killing it. Maybe the alphabet/language root decoding is helping math scores?

ITS has a middle school that is half their testing size which brings another dynamic in play. You should look at grade by grade to determine that (not sure of the sample size is large enough). Not apples to apples.

Only the 8th grade is super small this year. It's the last year of legacy small cohorts.

[Anonymous]

New North is doomed - look at Takoma and West’s pathetic scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New North is doomed - look at Takoma and West’s pathetic scores.

West doesn’t go to New North.

Whittier does though and was a bright spot. The others are Truesdell, Brightwood, and Takoma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ross loses a lot of high performers after 4th grade to BASIS charter.

Not this year. Most stayed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you all think the release of these scores will impact waitlists and enrollment? I’m wondering if we will see parents starting to remove their kid from waitlists for schools with less than stellar performance.

It will definitely be affecting my waitlists. Because our number sucks and I'm kissing the dream of Garrison goodbye. Seaton's not gonna happen. I'm in the top 5 at Langley and Langdon so I think there's still hope for one or the other. Never a Montessori believer so any fleeting interest I had in SSMA has been crushed like a bug.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New North is doomed - look at Takoma and West’s pathetic scores.

West doesn’t go to New North.

Whittier does though and was a bright spot. The others are Truesdell, Brightwood, and Takoma.

Whittier is decent - why are the others so poor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you all think the release of these scores will impact waitlists and enrollment? I’m wondering if we will see parents starting to remove their kid from waitlists for schools with less than stellar performance.

It will definitely be affecting my waitlists. Because our number sucks and I'm kissing the dream of Garrison goodbye. Seaton's not gonna happen. I'm in the top 5 at Langley and Langdon so I think there's still hope for one or the other. Never a Montessori believer so any fleeting interest I had in SSMA has been crushed like a bug.

Seaton and Garrison are both typically much easier to get into at PK4 and K - I'm sure you know that, but just a reminder that a PK3 seat isn't the be-all end-all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you all think the release of these scores will impact waitlists and enrollment? I’m wondering if we will see parents starting to remove their kid from waitlists for schools with less than stellar performance.

It will definitely be affecting my waitlists. Because our number sucks and I'm kissing the dream of Garrison goodbye. Seaton's not gonna happen. I'm in the top 5 at Langley and Langdon so I think there's still hope for one or the other. Never a Montessori believer so any fleeting interest I had in SSMA has been crushed like a bug.

Seaton and Garrison are both typically much easier to get into at PK4 and K - I'm sure you know that, but just a reminder that a PK3 seat isn't the be-all end-all.

Thanks. I know. I just really wanted to get settled somewhere already and be able to tell DC "this is your school". I'm looking forward to being part of a small but active PTA and hopefully making a difference, so maybe Noyes and I were meant to be together.

[Anonymous]

I am just absolutely gobsmacked by the number of HRCS that turned in flat, weak, or downright alarming PARCC scores. I know there are reasons other than test scores that people choose these schools, but it is eye-opening to see it laid out like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if this is a small sample size issue, but looking at the raw data, ITS and LAMB seem to have horrible success with at risk- students whereas YY and Sela seem to be killing it. Maybe the alphabet/language root decoding is helping math scores?

YY has vanishingly few at-risk kids, so I don't know that you can draw a lot of conclusions from it. And Sela's population is also pretty small.

I think ITS' at risk kids are more in the middle school.due to backfilling, and it is hard to catch kids up if they enter far behind.

The conclusion you can draw from YY's set up is that a little Mandarin works to scare away almost all the at-risk kids, the entire point of the artifice.

Go YY, for killing it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if this is a small sample size issue, but looking at the raw data, ITS and LAMB seem to have horrible success with at risk- students whereas YY and Sela seem to be killing it. Maybe the alphabet/language root decoding is helping math scores?

YY has vanishingly few at-risk kids, so I don't know that you can draw a lot of conclusions from it. And Sela's population is also pretty small.

I think ITS' at risk kids are more in the middle school.due to backfilling, and it is hard to catch kids up if they enter far behind.

The conclusion you can draw from YY's set up is that a little Mandarin works to scare away almost all the at-risk kids, the entire point of the artifice.

Go YY, for killing it!

YY does not even have native speakers who are low-income. Maybe it is the insanely expensive aftercare?

[Anonymous]

Sela is like 23% at risk, so actually their numbers are pretty good for this population. In Ward 4 (not saying much), they beat everyone, except LAMB which they are roughly on par with. This could be the danger of a small size - they can swing widely from year to year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sela is like 23% at risk, so actually their numbers are pretty good for this population. In Ward 4 (not saying much), they beat everyone, except LAMB which they are roughly on par with. This could be the danger of a small size - they can swing widely from year to year.

Yes, Sela is impressive. I wonder how much of that is driven by tiny cohorts that are receiving lots of individual attention (and maybe additional funding from Sela's founders, outside of the per pupil funding?). Last year, they had 24 3rd, 19 4th, and 6 5th graders. (not so different from Shining Stars or Lee, actually)

Hmm, maybe the better takeaway is that if you have a truly tiny testing cohort, it's hard to come to any conclusions about what your scores mean. Because with tiny cohorts, Lee and Shining Stars are not getting the same results as Sela.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sela is like 23% at risk, so actually their numbers are pretty good for this population. In Ward 4 (not saying much), they beat everyone, except LAMB which they are roughly on par with. This could be the danger of a small size - they can swing widely from year to year.

Yes, Sela is impressive. I wonder how much of that is driven by tiny cohorts that are receiving lots of individual attention (and maybe additional funding from Sela's founders, outside of the per pupil funding?). Last year, they had 24 3rd, 19 4th, and 6 5th graders. (not so different from Shining Stars or Lee, actually)

Hmm, maybe the better takeaway is that if you have a truly tiny testing cohort, it's hard to come to any conclusions about what your scores mean. Because with tiny cohorts, Lee and Shining Stars are not getting the same results as Sela.

Right, but Lee and SSMA have almost no at-risk students, and their scores are abysmal. Sela has almost a quarter....I’m curious how Breakthrough will do, since they seem similar to Lee in approach and population.

[Anonymous]

Hello 50 point achievement gap at its.